Trial reportBMC health services research2015
Is cost effectiveness sustained after weekend inpatient rehabilitation? 12 month follow up from a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC health services research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial-Based Economic Evaluations Conducted alongside Studies Embedded in Australian Healthcare Services and Programs: A Scoping Review.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2026Review
- Impact of Seven-Day Versus Five-Day Inpatient Physiotherapy: A Review of Clinical and Economic Outcomes.Cureus · 2026Review
- Person-Centered Health Intervention Programs Provided at Home to Older Adults with Multimorbidities and Their Caregivers: A Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- Patient Judgement of Change with Elective Surgery Correlates with Patient Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Additional saturday occupational therapy for adults receiving inpatient physiotherapy rehabilitation: a prospective cohort study.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Patients' and professionals' perspectives on the consideration of patients' convenient therapy periods as part of personalised rehabilitation: a focus group study with patients and therapists from inpatient neurological rehabilitation.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Health Services Research in Rehabilitation and Disability-The Time is Now.Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2018Article
- Empirical evidence of recall bias for primary health care visits.BMC health services research · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOur previous work showed that providing additional rehabilitation on a Saturday was cost effective in the short term from the perspective of the health service provider. This study aimed to evaluate if providing additional rehabilitation on a Saturday was cost effective at 12 months, from a health system perspective inclusive of private costs.
methodsCost effectiveness analyses alongside a single-blinded randomized controlled trial with 12 months follow up inclusive of informal care. Participants were adults admitted to two publicly funded inpatient rehabilitation facilities. The control group received usual care rehabilitation services from Monday to Friday and the intervention group received usual care plus additional Saturday rehabilitation. Incremental cost effectiveness ratios were reported as cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained and for a minimal clinical important difference (MCID) in functional independence.
resultsA total of 996 patients [mean age 74 years (SD 13)] were randomly assigned to the intervention (n = 496) or control group (n = 500). The intervention was associated with improvements in QALY and MCID in function, as well as a non-significant reduction in cost from admission to 12 months (mean difference (MD) AUD$6,325; 95% CI -4,081 to 16,730; t test p = 0.23 and MWU p = 0.06), and a significant reduction in cost from admission to 6 months (MD AUD$6,445; 95% CI 3,368 to 9,522; t test p = 0.04 and MWU p = 0.01). There is a high degree of certainty that providing additional rehabilitation services on Saturday is cost effective. Sensitivity analyses varying the cost of informal carers and self-reported health service utilization, favored the intervention.
conclusionsFrom a health system perspective inclusive of private costs the provision of additional Saturday rehabilitation for inpatients is likely to have sustained cost savings per QALY gained and for a MCID in functional independence, for the inpatient stay and 12 months following discharge, without a cost shift into the community.
trial registrationAustralian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry November 2009 ACTRN12609000973213.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.